
Qass .x^-!^ /^ 



1- 



TO "^ 




THE MEMBERS n^ ^ 

OF THE "\. ''')' 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES* 

OF THE 

FORTY-FIFTH CONGRESS. 



Washington, D. C, February 22, 1879. 

I propose to review, as briefly as possible, the action of certain mem- 
bers of the House of Representatives towards me prior to, during, and 
after my trial before the Committee on Eeform in the Civil Service. If 
any one should question the propriety of my course, I refer for my jus- 
tification to all the facts in connection with the case, and especially to 
the unfair speeches made by the Hons. J. D. Cox, J. H. Baker, and Car- 
ter H. Harrison in support of the majority report against me, made up 
by garbling the testimony and distorting the facts, to which I had no 
opportunity to make a personal reply, nor had my friends on the floor a 
chance to state my case fairly to the House. Messrs. Cox, Baker, and 
other Republicans of their class, were not governed by any patriotic 
sentiments of reforming the Democratic House, nor of purifying the Dem- 
ocratic party at large; on the contrary, their object was to increase the 
scandal about Democratic Doorkeepers, which began with the dismissal 
of Fitzhugh, by forcing a repetition of that memorable scene in my case. 
No one can arrive at any other conclusion after carefully reading the tes- 
timony taken in the case, and after an impartial study of the whole in- 
vestigation from first to last. 

A conspiracy had been formed by a band of outside soreheads, com- 
forted and counseled by some on the inside of the House, and when re- 
cruited, as thpy were, by the two informers whom I had discharged from 
my departmv.'i., their plans culminated in the introduction of a resolu- 
tion to investigate the charges preferred against me, submitted to the 
House by the Hon. J. H. Baker, of Indiana — perhaps the meanest man 
in Congress. 

To aid and abet these conspirators, there were not wanting a sufficient 
number of Democratic members who had not forgiven me for disappoint- 
ing them in getting places under me for their friends, so much sought 
after in the general scramble. There were not many such who became 
co-conspirators, but a sufficient number to accomplish their purpose. As 
my case progressed they were able to influence a few better men than 
themselves to join in the raid on me, disregarding their duty to their 
party and to me, an officer of the House, entitled at least to fair play, 
which I did not receive ; I was in an open field, with an ambushed enemy 
in and out of Congress, firing at me. 



-7=77 



The Hon. Olarkson N. Potter, of New York, is the first gentleman I 
shall refer to as one of my enemies. 

Much was said to my injury about ray appointments on the "Soldiers' 
Roll." To show how I was forced to wrestle with that question, and 
what my experience with Mr. Potter was on it, I quote in full the pro- 
ceedings of a caucus of the New York Democratic delegation, which ex- 
plains Itself: 

At a meeting of the Democratio Representatives of the State of New York, to the 45th 
Congress, held at the Capitol, on the 1st day of November, 1877, in pursuance of notice 
duly given said delegation; there were present Messrs. Fernando Wood, Clarkson N. Pot- 
ter, Abm. S. Hewitt, Benj. A. Willis, S. L. Mayham, T. J. Quinn, N. Muller, A. Eick- 
hoff, E. Kirk Hart, Wm. D. Veeder, and James W. Covert. The absence of Mr. Bliss was 
explained as being caused by illness. All the others not in attendance, excepting Mr. 
Cox, were absent from the city on leave. The Hon. Fernando Wood was appointed chair- 
man, and James W. Covert, secretary. 

Col. J. W. Polk, Doorkeeper of the House, appeared in pursuance of invitation, and 
stated that he had accorded to the New York delegation the appointment of the follow- 
ing attaches to his department; One general messenger, salary >>1,000 per annum. Three 
messengers, soldiers' roll, $3,600 in all. Three pages for regular session, $1,800. 

The above being in addition to the pageship previously promised to Mr. Muller. 

On motion, duly made and seconded, Eugene Durnin was unanimously recommended 
for general messenger. Jno. B. Trainor, of New York ; Jacob D. Hutton, of Greene, N. 
Y.; , of Westchester county, N. Y., (the name to be supplied by Mr. Pot- 
ter,) were unanimously recommended for appointment on the soldiers' roll. 

On motion, the three pages were directed to be named as follows : One by Mr. Hart, 
one by Mr. Covert, one by Mr. Veeder. Having made the foregoing formal recommenda- 
tions, on motion of Mr. Hewitt, it was Resolved, That without prejudicing the appoint- 
ments heretofore at this meeting recommended, the request be made that Mr. Murphy be 
retained as messenger; that the delegation recommend the appointment of Abm. Van 
Vetchler Brown to a messengership if a vacancy occurs, or if more messengers shall be 
appointed. 

That the Doorkeeper be requested, in addition to the pageships accorded to the delega- 
tion, to appoint, if possible, another page on the recommendation of Mr. Hewitt ; all 
the above requests, however, under Mr. Hewett's motion, to be without prejudice to the 
formal recommendations herein made by the delegation. On motion adjourned. 

James W. Covert, .Secretary. (Signed,) Fernando Wood, Chairman. 

The blank, which it will be observed, was left on the soldiers' list for 
Mr. Potter, was, on the 12th day of November, filled with the name of ■ 
E. J. Horton, by ray clerk, (Coryell,) in the pre.sence of and at the dic- 
tation of Mr. Potter, as he informed rae ; and at the same time Mr. Hor- 
ton was sworn in without my presence, consent, or approval, as the oath 
will show. I .ifterwarda found Mr. Hort.n on the floor of the House, 
where, after examining him, I discovered he had not been a soldier, much 
less a disabled one; but. on the contrary, was an able-bodied newspaper 
man from Mr. Potter's district, whereupon I refuse'd to. appoint hira on 
the soldiers' roll, or to assign him to duty. After this he called me into 
the cloak room to talk the matter over with Mr. Potter, where I in- 
formed that gentleman also I could not appoint his man on that roll, 
and, a.s the place had been so naraed for him, none but a disabled soldier 
would be accepted. Mr. Potter became somewhat excited and overbear- 
ing in his manner and thereafter ceased to recognize me. This manner 
toward.s me was maintained l)y him until the close of my trial. Our re- 
lations did not, howfivor, restrain him from sitting in judgment on me 
while I wa.H h(^\\\'X iv\oA, nor from signing fho majority report condemn- 
ing me, ;ind votiu;: lor the resolution to dismiss me. 



After tliis, Mr. Horton remained a guest of his member in the hall of 
the House, generally occupying that gentleman's seat in his absence, or 
otherwise in the way, doing nothing whatever for the Government, which 
fact, nevertheless, did not prevent Mr. Potter from seeking pay out of 
the public treasury for Mr. Horton's valuable services at the rate of 
$100 per month, by having a resolution introdueed and referred to the 
Committee on Accounts to pay E. J. Horton $155.93. (See Record, 1st 
Session, page 722.) This resolution was introduced by the Hon. Heis- 
ter Clymer, at the written request of Mr. Potter, as he (Clymer) in- 
formed me. The committee disallowed the account upon ray testimony, 
which did not increase Mr. Potter's regard for me. 

I was equally unfortunate, on the soldier question, with the Hon. 
Benj. A. Willis", of New York, who drew a soldier, (as will be seen by 
reference to the proceedings.) I found his man, Mr. Jno. B. Trainer, a 
New York politician also, with no claims whatever to entitle him to a 
place among the disabled soldiers. Mr. Willis stormed about it, and 
henceforth became my opponent. This trouble about Mr. Trainer, who 
was acting as private secretary to Mr. J. H. Acklen, involved the loss 
of the latter gentleman's vote also. Thus it will be seen the unfortunate 
selection made by the New York delegation of able-bodied politicians, 
(who probably never heard the report of a hostile gun during the civil 
war,) to go on the disabled soldiers' roll, gained for me the displeasure 
ol three Democratic Representatives, because I refused to become a 
party to the fraud two of them attempted to practice. 

Candor forces me to confess, however, that I was not as successful in 
avoiding the deceptions of some others named, who not only succeeded 
in deceiving me, but their members also, as to their competency for 
the soldiers" roll ; but in time 1 succeeded in regulating that roll, so 
that when I was removed there was not, in my judgment, a man on it 
not entitled, under the law, to be there. 

The last man I removed from it was Mr. Jas. G. Knight, Gen. Bragg's 
soldier, and the same to whom Mr. Frye, in his speech, alluded as follows : 
"Was a soldier in 1861;" sprained his "ankle" while drilling; served 
until 1864, after he had " sprained his ankle." He had been fastened 
on me as a disabled soldier by the representations of both General Bragg 
and himself, repeatedly made, and especially after I had informed all 
the Democratic members of the Wisconsin delegation by letter, and 
General Bragg orally and by letter, that in the readjustment of my rolls 
I could give to their State but one messenger, and he on the soldiers' 
roll ; and at the same time notified them that, inasmuch as it was my 
understanding they wished Mr. Knight to have the place, I had 
-ut his name on the printed list furnished their chairman, but no ap- 
pointment would be made without their sanction. The list was in their 
case — as in that of every other delegation — subject to their revision. 
Whoever they should name would be appointed. That discretion ac- 
corded to every delegation was thoroughly understood by every Demo- 
cratic member of the House, and by none b'Hter than by General Bragg, 
who was, at the time referred to, in Washington in advance of his Dem- 
ocratic colleagues several days before the assembling of Congress after 



the recess. In conversation with him held in my office, on the subject 
of Mr. Knight's appointment, I expressed some doubt of that gentle- 
man's eligibility for the soldiers' roll. General Bragg replied : " I 
know him to be; put him on, and I will fight it out on the floor of the 
House if the question is raised. The whole delegation want him to have 
the appointment." 

The way he fought it out was to say, in an interview published in the 
Washington Post on the 16th day of last April: "Mr. Knight did not 
ask to be put on ttie soldiers' roll, nor did I or any one else ever make 
such claims for him." In the same interview he also said that I had, 
in my evidence before the committee, stated that Mr. Knight was a 
chivalrous " soldierly gentleman," but that "I said so before I knew the 
Wisconsin delegation was going to vote for my dismissal." That is 
true : I don't deny being deceived in more instances than this. An ex- 
amination of the testimony will show that I was speaking of the past, 
and I had not, up to that time, believed that a gentleman who had worn 
the honored uniform of a Brigadier General, would distort facts lor the 
purpose of imposing upon me a slightly damaged quartermaster for a 
gallant disabled line officer to secure him a $1,200 place in the Door- 
keeper's office. After my removal, Mr. Knight — smarting under Mr. 
Frye's ridicule — addressed a letter to that gentleman, the following ex- 
tract from which was read by him to the House : " What 1 desire to 
gay, it was no fault of mine that I was on the soldiers roll ; I was put 
there without my knowledge, and kept there against my protest. Very 
respectfully, J. G. Knig-ht." — (See Record, 2d Session, page 2,311.) 
This letter was written and read to the House in April. On the 26th 
of February, five weeks before my removal, I received from Mr. Knight 
a letter, in response to my demand on him for more evidence of his 
competency, under the law, for the position he held oa the soldiers' roll, 
from which the following is an extract ; '' I accompany this with my 
affidavit, which, perhaps, will furnish the proofs you desire." The affi- 
davit referred to was received under the same cover, from which I insert 
the following extract: 

" That during the time he w%s serving in the army as aforesaid, and in the discharge of 
his duty as an officer, he so injured his foot and ankle that he has suffered from the same, 
ai'l been lam-i a large portion of the time ever since, and that he is now a sufferer from said 
injury. JAMES Q^. KNIGHT. 

" Sioorn to and subscribed before mc this 20th day of February, 1878. 

"ZACff. B. BROOKE, J. P. [ seal.]" 

(I have italicised all extracts.) 

With the above evidence in my possession, and more I can produce, I 
have no hesitation in asserting that I am prepared to make good all I 
have said on the subject. Moreover, if it will encourage General Bragg 
to call for a committee of investigation, I repeal, that both he and his 
man practiced deception on me to secure the appointment, and then af- 
terwards misstated the facts to shield themselves and cast odium on me. 

If Messrs. Cook, Henry, Cravens, and Eden, who spoke, and other 
gentlemen who desired to speak in defense of the minority report, had 
not been cut off in their time, (in violation of what the Speaker and all 
of them understood to be an agreement,) manv things in connection 



with the soldiers' roll, and other questions not fully explained, would 
have been raado clear to the House. If my own Representative, (Mr. 
Franklin,) who was specially charged with the facts, could have obtained 
the floor after the previous question had been ordered, he probably 
would have infused into those who abandoned me on a stampede at 
Frye's speech, some of his own manliness, and stimulated them into 
sustaining me for the sake of justice, instead of deserting me through 
fear, as they did. 

soldiers' eoll. 

If all the facts in connection with the soldiers' roll had been fairly 
presented to the House, instead of being garbled, as they were, by those 
opposed to me, it would have been seen that there had been little or no 
cause of complaint. The facts are plain and simple. In the first place, 
the Appropriation Committee had omitted the words " disabled " or 
"crippled." The provision in the law reads " $16,800 00 to pay four- 
teen messeno;ers on the soldiers' roll." 

My predecessor, who, like myself, had probably been deceived, or at 
least the question had not been raised on him, had put on that roll 
some men who, under the present construction of that law, would not 
be considered eligible. I found there several such, and did not remove 
them immediately; in fact, under what I learned had been a decision of the 
Judiciary Committee, I questioned my right to do so. On the 1st of 
December, 1877, when I decided to readjust my roll, my difficulty then 
was to get enough Democratic members willing to take soldiers. In 
order to fill up the roll, I ofiered the appointments to several besides 
those for whom these places had been intended. Among those who 
spurned the offer was the Hon. Carter H. Harrison. The'result was, 
there were several vacancies nearly every month from December until 
March ; so, to absorb the appropriation, I put on, temporarily, as the 
frequent changes on the roll will show, the names of other employees 
doing the work the soldiers would have done, until they should be fur- 
nished me by the members entitled to the appointments. Such em- 
ployees were not appointed as soldiers. For instance, no one can seri- 
ously think I intended to appoint Lafayette Fitzhugh, a mere boy, per- 
manently on the disabled soldiers' roll. That is the whole case, and 
the testimony, fairly considered, shows nothing more. As before stated, 
I had been sometimes deceived, but corrected the mistakes as I could. 

NEW YORK DELEGATION. 

The history of my transactions with the New York delegation serves, 
in a general way, to illustrate my experience with some others. On the 
final issue, all the Democrats of that delegation voted against me, ex- 
cepting Messrs. Beebee, Benedict, Mayham; Muller and Covert paired 
for me, Mr. Hart, who was absent and ill, and Messrs. Bliss and Quinn, 
who were present and voted for me, 

THE PENNSYLVANIA. DELEGATION. 

The Pennsylvania Democratic delegation held a meeting also on the 
1st of November ; all present excepting Mr. Collins, lo arrange the ap- 



point-fTif^nt of t-,heir men to fill the place? I had accorded that State, and, 
notwithstanding I had heen more liberal with Pennsylvania than any- 
other State, several of the members were dissatisfied and clamored for 
more. Bach, excepting Mr. Olymer, wanted an appointment in my de- 
partment. After resisting the pressure for some time, and after the 
assurance had been given me that the House would increase my force 
to cover the extra appointmetits, I yielded, and agreed to appoint four 
more, three of them to be " session messengers." When it came to a 
vote on the resolution to dismiss me, all voted against me excepting 
Messrs. Riley, Collins, and the Speaker, who, although not voting, were 
on my side, as they have since assured me. 

Without specifying, at this time, the particular members, I will say 
that the fourteen Democratic members representing districts in the 
former slave States, who voted against me, did so on personal grounds, 
growing out of my failure to satisfy them in making my appointments, 
for even with the stretch I made, 1 could not please all, but found my- 
self in Mr. Lincoln's predicament, with " more pigs than teats to suck." 
It is a pleasure, however, to be able to say that there was a goodly 
number of other members (whom also I shall not now name,) I had 
failed to oblige, but who rose above selfish resentment, and stood by 
me. It is to me a cause of sincere regret that some of these gentlemen 
have not been rsturned to the positions in the 46th Congress they have 
30 highly honored in the present. That sorrow is somewhat soothed, 
however, by the knowledge that a far greater proportion of those who 
opposed me have been retired ; among them, six of the seven members 
of the committee who signed the majority report against me, including 
the three Democrats. 

HONS. JACOB D. COX AND CARTER H. HARRISON. 

The occasion of my trial just suited Mr. Cox, who, with his allies on 
the committee to sustain him by a majority vote on all questions, and 
the weak minded Harrison to rule ifor him, right or wrong, was 
able to run the committee pretty much his own way. From the first 
he showed more zeal as a prosecutor than desire to give me a fair trial. 
Upon the charges preferred against me, apparently sympathizing alto- 
gether with the two informers, (Coryell and Duffy;) even after they had 
when on the witness stand, discredited their own affidavits contained in 
the Baker resolution, to such an extent that the committee was forced 
to admit it was unnecessary to produce testimony on my part to rebut 
their statements, and so notified me. Mr. Cox saw the prosecution had 
broken down, so far as the charges of corruption were involved, which 
was all there was in th(3 case the committee had been ordered to inves- 
tigate. The remaining offence was not denied, and had been condoned 
by the House of Representatives. It was at this piiint Mr. Cox, regard- 
less of justice to me, ranged outside of the charges with no apparent 
purpose but that of convicting me to gain a party triumph. 

I wfis before the committee ou charges contained in the affidavits of 

two men I had discharged, one (Coryell) for incompetency, and for 

■ slaiidei-iag members of thu House who demanded his removal; the other 

(Duffy) for drunkeness and rude conduct. They were put on the wit- 



ness stand early in the investigation, examined and discharged, and after- 
wards paid in violation of law for the whole period of my investigation. 
Thev were kept by Mr. Cox as his prompters, Coryell occupying con- 
stantly a whispering relation to that gentleman throughout the trial. 
They also acted as scavengers in the interims, to have ready-made for 
each meeting anonymous charges against me that had no business there, 
even if they had been true. 

Contrary to uhe well-established rules of evidence, I was put on the 
witness stand before the witnesses for the prosecution, upon whom 
should have rested the responsibility of making good their information, 
and was thus made a witness for the prosecution against myself; as fast 
as they broke down, the drag-nets were used to gather up new issues and 
new lies, to harass me with. 

Messers. Cook, Henry, Cravens and Garth, who signed the minority 
report, all gentlemen and able lawyers, showed every disposition to 
give me a fair trial ; but they were only four against seven, and were 
therefore impotent. They ceased to attend the meetings with punct- 
uality, seeing, no doubt, there was no use in their doing so. My able and 
distinguished counsel, Judge Hanna, of Indiana, attempted to get the com- 
mittee to observe the rules of practice governing the court in such cases, 
but that truculent majoricy vote rendered his efforts abortive also, and 
thus for more than six weeks was I so treated to give Mr. Cox a chanca 
to practice his political strategy, which resulted in a decided success 
in one congressional district, if no more, that of the Hon. Carter H. 
Harrison, whose apprehension was so feeble, and his egotism so strong, 
he never seemed to realize that he was suspending a sword of justice 
over his own head, and was being used by this crafty partisan to the 
injury of his (Harrison's) own party. 

Besides the majority on the committee, Mr. Cox had to support him 
an outside lobby, composed, as they were, of disappointed office-seekers, 
discharged office-holders, dead-beats and Capitol rounders; among them 
the Clerk Weiner and the sergeant-at-arms to the committee then trying 
me. The latter was Mr. Harrison's man (Whalen.) This fellow had pro- 
posed to me, after the Baker resolution had been referred, that if I 
would appoint him to a place, and date his oatli one day back of the 
introduction of the resolution, to shield Harrison, that gentleman would 
be my friend in my investigation. I declined. I told Mr. Baker of 
this, who informed Harrison that I said he (Harrison) had made me the 
offer. We three met for explanation in the hall of the House at Mr, 
Errett's seat, where I corrected Mr. Baker's version, and informed them 
that it was Mr. Harrison's man who had made the proposition. Notwith- 
standing, Whalen was employed as a confidential officer to the committee. 
This same man had offered before that, as the price of a positi n, to keep 
me posted in the proceedings of the conspirators, with whom ho was 
meeting as an accomplice, and actually did force on me many of the 
names and some of their plans before I could stop him. He was utterly 
suprised and disgusted when I informed him thai I desired no information 
obtained from a traitor; and he is the same man about whom Mr. Harrison 
quarreled with me at the desk occupied by the Sergeant-at-Arms of the 



House and ceased to speak to me until after the resolution to investigate 
me had been referred to his committee. 

To cap the climax, Messrs. Cox, Harrison and James, held without 
notice to the other members of the committee, or to myself, secret 
meetings, and reopen.-d ray case four days after the two reports had been 
made to the House and put on the calender, by stealthily bringing iu 
new witnesses and examining them on new issues hunted up by Coryell, 
who was also acting as sergeant-at-arms to the inquisition. I made this 
discovery by accident, and surprised them in the act by entering the 
committee room unannounced. In reply to my expostulation, Mr. 
Harrison said : "We consider we have the right to take testimony in 
your case in any manner we see proper. Your friend in the House re- 
fused to let my report be considered. Your son-in-law, Buell, has 
abused me in the newspapers, and you discharged my page, Bradford 
Whitely." 

Before my departure, it was agreed that if any more witnesses should 
be examined, I would be sent for to hear and cross-examine them ; that 
promise was not kept, nor was it intended to be kept, for both Eugene 
Durnin and H. M. Rogers were sworn and examined after that, on the 
same day, without my knowledge. The testimony thus obtained was used 
in the debate before the House by both Harrison and Cox, they suppress- 
ing parts of Mr. Rogers' testimony which were materially in my favor. 



CIVIL SERVICE. 



So far as developed, the uses of the committee on reform in the civil 
service have been — to" immolate one Doorkeeper, report one bill, white- 
wash three members who needed no vindication, and recklessly spend 
about $5,000.00 of the public money, mostly in the payment of claims 
for services under the Doorkeeper, none of which were legal, not more 
than half of them in any sense equitable, and some of them had no shadow 
of right. This was done against my protest, submitted to the commit- 
tee through the courtesy of General Cook, a member of it, before any of 
the claims had been presented. When the resolution was introduced 
by Mr. James, which led to the provision in the Sundry Civil bill of 
|7,000, to be disbursed by the Civil Service Committee, I foresaw the 
raid that would be made, on that fund by the crowd who have always 
outmanaged their representatives, and through them had outmanaged 
me ; and to prevent imposition on the Government, as well as to avoid 
further odium on myself, I prepared the protest or statement above re- 
ferred to, and emljolied in it a full list of those employees entitled to 
pay who ha<l not been on the regular monthly pay rolls, but who had 
been paid by myself out of my own pocket, (with three exceptions 
named,) who were subsequently paid in one of the appropriation bills. 
The amount thus advanced by me, for which I made no claim on the 
Government, amounted in the aggregate to about $800.00, for which I 
have the receii)tH of the parties. All, or nearly all of them, filed their 
accounts, no doubt in some cases with the intention of collecting the 
money for the purpose of returning it tome. About one-half of that 
class of claims have been paid, out of which there has been returned to 



me $224.00: two of the olaimants, Frank "Rrwin and Charles Kyle, who 
were paid their claims, refused to return my money ; thus they drew 
double salaries. The others, although equally just and valid, have not 
been allowed by the sub-committee auditing the claims. I can look upon 
their action in but one way — which is to keep me out of money I might 
receive. 

The roll certified to by the chairman, (Mr. Harrison,) on which the 
clerk paid these allowances at the adjournment of the last session in 
June, shows sixty-two names, receiving, in the aggregate, |5,532.32. 
The majority of those paid were discharged by me on the last ot Novem- 
ber, 1877, and notified by the following notice, posted up in my office 
and published in the Washington Post one week, which speaks for itself. 
The Committee on Accounts had audited and paid these claims on the 
20th December, out of the appropriation of $3,840 made by the House 
for that object : 

DOOKKEEPER'S NOTICE. 

Doorkeeper's Office, 
December 22, 1877. 
All persons who have been employed in the Doorkeeper's Department of the House of 
Representatives, are hereby notified that only those now on my regular roll will be con- 
sidered in the employ of the Government, and none others will be considered as having 
claim to pay. No more appointments will be made, therefore applications are useless. 
Attention is called to the following resolution : 

J NO. W. POLK, 
Doorkeeper House of Representatives. 
Resolved, That the Doorkeeper be, and he is hereby, instructed to furnish the Pages, 
authorized by law, with suitable badges indicating their employments, and to keep the 
floor of the House free of all other boys ; and he is hereby instructed to prevent any per- 
son from performing or pretending to perform service in any of the rooms, offices, and 
halls connected with his department, except those on the regular rolls authorized bylaw 
(Signed) CHARLES B. ROBERTS, 

Chairman Committee on Accounts. 

The sub-committee of the Civil Service Committee took the ground, 
no doubt, that the Committee on Accounts had not allowed these 
claimants sufficient amounts; hence they revised its action. 

That roll shows that some of these same men who had been dis- 
charged by me, and who come under the above notice, but who had 
been retained by different committees of the House, (with which ar- 
rangement the Doorkeeper could not interfere,) have been paid in the 
niost capricious and unequitable way : for instance, for the same ser- 
vices performed under the same circumstances, and for the same time, 
one was allowed $702.86, (from which should be subtracted $48 on 
account of no pay received by him from the Committee on Accounts,) 
one was paid $578.55, another $59.79, and another $18.13. The 
above is an official transcript from the roll cer'ified to by the chair- 
man of the Committee on Reform in the Civil Service. 

It is due to the other members of the committee that I should 
state that these claims, as I understand it, were audited by a sub- 
committee, composed of Messrs. Harrison, James, and Garth, but Mr. 
Garth was seldom at their meetings, and had but little, if anything-, 
to do with the business; therefore the reyponsibility rests upon the 
other two, Harrison and James. On one occasion I was called to 



10 

testify as to the validity of the claim of Mr. Wm. Whalens, (Mr. 
Harrison's man.) I swore he was entitled to nothing. Mr. James 
remarked "we can't allow it," and made some writing on the back 
of the claim. The roll shows he was paid |61.06. Mr. Garth was 
not present. I desire to direct attention to section 6438 of the E,evised 
Statutes. 

To the best of my recollection, I was not called upon to testify in 
any other case. The whole committee allowed my son, on the mo- 
tion of Mr. Morgan, $225 for his services as page for four months ; 
this (I want it known) was done after I had notified the committee 
that my son was a minor, and could make no claim, and that I made 
no claim for him. 

I was tried by a committee, two members of which had not spoken to me 
for some time before on account of the offense given them about their ap- 
pointments. I refer to Messrs. Potter and Harrison, both of whom 
signed the majority report condemning me. I was sacrificed to treach- 
ery, malice, and cowardice, and dismissed when my force on the rolls 
were in strict conformity to the law. My department was in smoothe 
working order when I turned it over to my successor. There was no 
necessity for change, and he has made but little. My appointees, with 
but few exceptions, are still in the positions I placed them. He has 
been exempted from the vexations which beset me in the organization 
of a new Congress, where nearly every member wanted an appointment 
under me ; he escaped all the trouble which had been encountered by 
me, and is, with no fault on his part, now enjoying the advantages ac- 
cruing from my misfortune. That is the plain English of it. 

The House passed, at the same session they dismissed me, a resolution 
exhonerating me from the charge of corruption and malfeasance, which 
was a full acknowledgment that it had done a wrong in turning me out ; 
also, one to pay my expenses incurred in my trial, (which has not yet 
been received.) This was liberal, but very much like paying a man's 
funeral expenses for the privilege of killing him. 

To the three Republicans, Messrs. Butler, Jorgenson, and Welsh, who 
*^oted for me, I am profoundly grateful. I also owe thanks to Mr. Eu- 
gene Hale, who said kind words for me, and to Messrs. Foster, Page, 
G-arfield, Blair, Boyd, Crapo, Danford, Gain, Errett, Davis, (of Gal.,) 
Ketchum, Metcalf, Overton, Powers, Rainey, Stewart, Smalls, Thorn- 
burg, J. C. Stone, Tipton, Bisbee, Ev;ins, (N. J.,) Gardner and Watson, 
Republicans, who abstained from voting, thereby placing principle and 
justice above a party advantage. To Mr. Elsworth, of Michigan, who 
was my steady friend from first to last, I owe an everlasting debt of 
gratitude. It is annecccssary to express my gratitude to the nearly one 
hundred gentlemen of my own party who stood up for me throughout 
by speaking, voting, and pairing lor me. 

IN CONCLUSION. 

All who have been familiar with me will admit that T have made but 
little complaint about the treatment I have received. It will, no doubt, 
be said I am late in my explanation, and the question asked why I did 
not bring out all these facts during my investigation. The reply to that 



11 

is, I had strong assurances from leading de-'nocratic members, tliat if I 
protected my honor, and freed myself of the charges of corruption, my 
mistakes would be overlooked, (that I did so the resolution of the House 
attests;) and also, that the House would take into consideration the al- 
most impossibility of not making mistakes under all the difficulties that 
beset me. My motive was to avoid furoher party scandal. I was, more- 
over, under oath not to tell House secrets. Afterwards, when I saw I 
had been badly advised and betrayed, I prepared all the facts to be pre- 
sented to the House in the debate. My enemies got wind of my inten- 
tion and cut off my friends as before explained. Soon after my removal 
I referred to them in the press, and more especially in a letter addressed 
to the Hon. Jacob D. Cox soon after the adjournment of the last session, 
which was published in the New York Tribune. Reference to that let- 
ter will show that the leading charges embodi<^d in this were contained 
in that communication. The gentlemen referred to have drawn around 
themselves a circle of exclusive Congressional dignity, and treated me 
with silence, endeavoring, thereby, to shield themselves from the effect 
of the charges they dare not deny. Besides it is altogether a question 
of judgment. It is never too late for a gentleman who feels himself ag- 
grieved to seek his own method of redress. I have the right to be the 
sole judge of when and how I shall protect my own honor. This is a per- 
sonal matter. If any Rrepresentative referred to desires to call for an 
investigation of the charges I have made, I promise to make them all 
good without delay, or, failing, take the consequences without complaint. 
I am also aware that I will be freely criticised for this publication. 

I will mention, as a further justification, which of itself would govern 
me,without regard to whom I may please or displease. I refer to private 
slanders of myself. Within a month past Mr. James has informed me 
that it had been reported to their committee that I was both a drunk- 
ard and a gambler. When I asked him for the author of this lie he re- 
plied, "It was some of the witnesses," referring to the witnesses in my in- 
vestigation. No such testimony was ever taken in open sessions. Another 
report, coming indirectly, was that there had been something crooked 
in my purchase of coal for the use of the House. God knows what more. 
I pronounce both of the above infamous lies and slanders. I have never 
made any disparaging statement a.bout any member or officer of Con- 
gress to which I have not signed my name, as I do to this, and I shall 
submit to no dark lantern attacks on myself. 

One meeting will be sufficient for me to submit all the proofs I have 
in my possession to sustain my statements. 

JNO. W. POLK. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



013 789 635 7 



